Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 090206 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 149 and supporting documentation submitted by the Applicant. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 080514 Chapter: 14-12c(2) AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: B Co, Warrior Transition Bn, USAMEDDAC, Fort Campbell, KY Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080305, disobeyed a lawful order not to consume alcohol while on prescription medications (080112), wrongfully used cocaine (071230-080130); reduced to the grade of E1, forfeiture of $670.00 pay per month for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG). Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 22 Current ENL Date: 031120 Current ENL Term: 04 Years Record of evidence indicates the Applicant's term of enlistment was extended for PEB/MEB determination. Current ENL Service: 04 Yrs, 05 Mos, 25 Days Moral Waiver Total Service: 04 Yrs, 05 Mos, 25 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11B Infantryman GT: 127 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq (060208-060907) Decorations/Awards: AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR, CIB V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Mt. Morris, IL Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the Aplicant. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 29 April 2008, the unit commander notified the Applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for disobeying a lawful order by consuming alcohol while on prescription medications, driving under the influence while consuming alcohol, testing positive for the use of cocaine (080130) and, refusing to perform extra duty which was assigned as a consequence of a Field Grade Article 15 (080311), with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The Applicant was advised of his rights. On 7 May 2008, the separation authority directed that the Applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions. The record of evidence contains the following information: An MP Report indicating the Applicant failed to operate a motor vehicle in a careful manner resulting in a traffic accident causing damage to property (25 August 2007); and, disorderly conduct (27 November 2007). Counseling statement (11 January 2008) indicating the Applicant acknowledged to his command that he had an alcohol abuse problem and agreed that he would enroll into ASAP on Monday, 14 January 2008. Counseling statement (12 January 2008) indicating the Applicant was charged by the Military Police for driving under the influence on 12 January 2008. The Applicant received a GOMOR (23 January 2008) reprimanding the Applicant for driving a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol content of .09 percent, in violation of Tennessee law (12 January 2008). The Applicant submitted to a urinalysis based on probable cause (PO) on 30 January 2008 which resulted in a positive result for cocaine (13 February 2008). Counseling statement (13 March 2008) indicating the Applicant refused to perform extra duty as assigned at the previous day's Field Grade Article 15. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 of this regulation establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or absence without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, however, a general under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After carefully examining the Applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and the issue and documents he submitted related to his diagnosis of PTSD, the analyst determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable. The analyst acknowledges the Applicant's combat tour in Iraq and the documents with his application. However, in review of the Applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The Applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a Soldier. The Applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By abusing illegal drugs, the Applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. Furthermore, the analyst acknowledges the Applicant's diagnosis of PTSD outlined in the documents with his application. However, in review of the Applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted, and that the Applicant fully understood the difference between right and wrong when he committed the misconduct that caused the unit commander to initiate the separation action. Additionally, the evidence of record shows that the command attempted to assist the Applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment. The Applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts. The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met, that the rights of the Applicant were fully protected through the separation process and presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. Therefore, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 15 July 2009 Location: Washington, D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the Applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army X. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: No Change RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090005984 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages